Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Observational Study to Compare Use of Drains Versus No Drains After Gynaecology Oncology Surgery at a Tertiary Care Centre

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Gynecologic Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of the study is to evaluate omission of routine use of drains after major gynaecology oncology cancer surgery in day-to-day practice.

Methods

The study consisted of 130 gynaecology cancer patients in two groups, study group (with no drains) and control group (with drains). The primary aim was to detect whether omitting drains leads to delay in detection of post-operative complications and overall complication rate between the two groups with the secondary aim of finding difference in length of hospital stay.

Results

There no patient in either group who required re-exploration for bleeding, bowel or urologic injury. There was statistical non-significant difference in complication rate, 22% versus 30% in study vs. control group, respectively. The overall length of hospital stay was a day less in study group (7.5 days in study group vs. 8.4 days in control group).

Conclusion

Routine use of drains in not required in all cases of gynaecological cancer surgery. Case-to-case base approach of using drain can be done without any increase in post-operative complications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Piovano E, Ferrero A, Zola P, Christain Marth, Mirza MR, Lindermann K. Clinical pathways of recovery after surgery for advanced ovarian/tubal/peritoneal cancer: an NSGO-MaNGO international survey in collaboration with AGO-a focus on surgical aspects. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2019;29:181–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Nelson G, Bakkum-Gamez J, Kalogera E, Glaser G, Altman A, Meyer LA, Taylor JS. Guidelines for perioperative care in gynecologic/oncology: enhanced recovery after surgery(ERAS) society recommendations-2019 update. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2019;29(4):651–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Puleo FJ, Mishra N, Hall JF. Use of intra-abdominal drains. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2013;26(3):174–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Shrikhande SV, Barreto SG, Shetty G, Suradkar K, Bodhankar YD, Shah SB, et al. Post-operative abdominal drainage following major upper gastrointestinal surgery: single drain versus two drains. J Cancer Res Ther. 2013;9(2):267–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Shepherd JH, Crowther ME. Complications of gynaecological cancer surgery: a review. J R Soc Med. 1986;79(5):289–93.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Franchi M, Trimbos JB, Zanaboni F, Velden J, Reed N, Coens C, et al. Randomised trial of drains vs no drain following radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection: a European organisation for research and treatment of cancer—gynaecological cancer group (EORTC-GCG) study in 234 patients. European Journal of Cancer. 2007;43(8):1265–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Charoenkwan K, Kietpeerakool C. Retroperitoneal drainage versus no drainage after pelvic lymphadenectomy for the prevention of lymphocyst formation in women with gynaecological malignancies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;6:CD007387.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Owens CD, Stoessel K. Surgical site infections: epidemiology, microbiology and prevention. J Hosp Infect. 2008;70(Suppl 2):3–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Novetsky AP, Zighelboim I, Guntupalli SR, Ioffe YJ, Kizer NT, Hagemann AR, et al. A phase II trial of a surgical protocol to decrease the incidence of wound complications in obese gynaecologic oncology patients. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;134(2):233–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Fujii T, Tabe Y, Yajima R, Yamaguchi S, Tsutsumi S, Asao T, et al. Effects of subcutaneous drain for the prevention of incisional SSI in high risk patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2011;26(9):1151–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Baier PK, Gluck NC, Baumgartner U, Adam U, Fischer A, Hopt UT. Subcutaneous redon drains do not reduce the incidence of surgical site infections after laparotomy. A randomized controlled trial in 200 patients. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2010;25(5):639–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Manzoor B, Heywood N, Sharma A. Review of subcutaneous wound drainage in reducing surgical site infections after laparotomy. Surg Res Pract. 2015;2015:715803.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Watanabe J, Ota M, Kawamoto M, Akikazu Y, Suwa Y, Suwa H, et al. A randomized controlled trial of subcutaneous closed-suction Blake drains for the prevention of incisional surgical site infection after colorectal surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2017;32(3):391–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ochiai K, Kaneko M, Nozawa H, Kawai K, Hata K, Tanaka T, et al. Incidence of and risk factors for lymphocele formation after lateral pelvic lymph node dissection for rectal cancer: a retrospective study. Colorectal Dis. 2020;22(2):161–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No internal or external funding was availed for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgical Oncology, DMCH Cancer Care Centre, Civil Lines, DMC Road, Tagore Nagar, Ludhiana, Punjab, 141001, India

    Sumeet Jain, Akashdeep Singh Sohi & G. S. Brar

  2. Department of Gynaecology Oncology, Ludhiana Mediways Hospital, Ludhiana, India

    Veena Jain

Authors
  1. Sumeet Jain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Akashdeep Singh Sohi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. G. S. Brar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Veena Jain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Dr. Sumeet Jain, Dr. Akashdeep Singh Sohi and Dr. G. S. Brar were involved in performing procedures and maintaining data base. All four authors were involved in writing and reviewing the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sumeet Jain.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jain, S., Sohi, A.S., Brar, G.S. et al. An Observational Study to Compare Use of Drains Versus No Drains After Gynaecology Oncology Surgery at a Tertiary Care Centre. Indian J Gynecol Oncolog 18, 53 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40944-020-00400-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40944-020-00400-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation